header-logo header-logo

23 April 2009 / Graham Reid
Issue: 7366 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

The long arm of the regulator

Graham Reid on the SRA's new powers
 
 

Since 31 March 2009, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has new powers to regulate firms of solicitors.

It will no longer be looking solely at individual responsibility for acts and omissions: it is also going after organisational under-performance and misconduct.

This new approach is reflected in changes to the Solicitors' Code of Conduct (the code). So, when the regulator says “you” must do something, in most cases this now means both solicitors and recognised bodies (the new label for what most people would still call “a solicitors' firm”).

These changes are backed up by enforcement powers. For minor infractions the SRA will be able to fine firms up to £2,000 and apply conditions to their authorisation. For the more serious cases the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has the power to levy unlimited fines on all types of firms, their managers and employees.

Inevitable

Firm-based regulation is a sensible and inevitable development. For one thing, it corrects an anomaly under the old code

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll